Schedule 19
Marine and Coastal Access Bill [Lords]
1:45 pm
Ann McKechin (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Scotland Office; Glasgow North, Labour)
This is an important debate and I would like to spend some time trying to answer concerns raised this afternoon and in another place. The objections mechanism set out in proposed new schedule 1A to the 1949 Act in schedule 19 to the Bill was of great concern to those in another place, many organisations and a number of committees. I appreciate the time and help that many gave to help us to introduce the process through which objections may be made. An objection can be made on the grounds that the proposals do not strike a fair balance within the meaning of clause 293, in so far as they relate to any of a list of particular matters, including the position of the route. The Secretary of State will make a determination, under section 52(1) of the 1949 Act and Natural England’s coastal access report, while having regard to any objections, Natural England’s comments, any representations forwarded to the appointed person and the recommendation of the appointed person.
Amendment 48 would delete paragraph 16(3)(a), which deals with a situation in which the appointed person considers a question of fact, and would change an amendment tabled by the Government in the Lords, the purpose of which was to ensure that if a report by an appointed person relating to an objection contained a statement of a finding or fact, the Secretary of State, in making the determination, would be bound by that finding, unless they were satisfied either that it was “perverse or irrational”—in one of the ways that a court might find an administrative decision perverse or irrational under judicial review before setting it aside—or else that it
“involves an assessment of the significance of a matter to any person with a relevant interest in land or to the public”.